In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 
David Tubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes

>> > The Defrag with DOS/Windows packs the data together, removing the
>> > fragments that got separated to be a whole continuous area of data.
>>This is correct.
>
>Or is it ?
>Defrag as done by Windows only attempts to stitch FILES back
>together, can still leave chunks of free space between data. No
>attempt to keep directories together.
>
>The quickest and most efficient defrag is to XCOPY all to another
>drive.volume - format  - and copy all back again.

Der ... der ...  DOS strikes back !

Yes, I recall that trick with XCOPY ... because it destroys data before 
it writes back ... so the "X" was an appropriate prefix.

>> > Internally I don't know how the QXL.WIN holds its directions to
>> > information.  Yet it will not be affected by defragmenting.
>>It can be. If the QXL.WIN file is spread of lots and lots of diosc
>>area, in multiple fragments,
>
>These days you will never know if QXL_WIN is in bits or where it is.
>You could ensure a contiguous file if you copied them into a virgin
>partition, you could create more than one, renaming them and keeping
>them in hand for later use.
>
>Back in days of DOS and W311 Central point had some great tools for
>seeing exactly where files were located and if fractured.
>
>As to whether or not QXL needs the treatment, less than likely, QDOS
>lacks the engine of fragmentation - an MS OS. So many files a
>silently extended, even in the root, and the whole system of temp
>files and swap/page file.
>But within QXL_WIN there comes a time when the space made available
>by deletion is not large enough to accommodate the next file to be
>saved there. Just do as Per suggested, WCOPY all to a new one, or a
>contiguous one you have been smart enough to prepare beforehand.

Yes, I guess a QXL.WIN does not get messed up with scattered files and 
spaces like a PC hard drive.

Interestingly, though I have found with WIN95 and QPC2 that a QXL.WIN of 
500Mb is slow to read ... and therefore better to stick to 150Mb.

-- 
Malcolm Cadman
_______________________________________________
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Reply via email to